differences autonomy included “efficiency” outcomes better generate

For policymakers, questions going forward: Are we smart “investors”? Non-instrumentality charters
and independent charters receive significantly less funding per student than traditional public
schools or instrumentality charter school. Yet despite educating similar economically disadvantaged
students, these charters achieve significantly better outcomes per dollar spent. Because these
schools can do more with less, policymakers should reconsider the merit of this funding disparity.
Should we be funding our best schools at a significantly lower amount? Should we consider ways in
which more independent and non-instrumentality charters could be authorized?
Why are certain charter schools doing more with less? This research can tell us that charters are
more efficient, but it cannot fully tell us why that is the case. To be sure, a significant portion of the
added cost of traditional public education goes to paying legacy costs that cannot be easily reduced.
To that extent, these schools are not burdened by the sins of the past. But that doesn’t explain better
absolute performance in these schools. The educational community and public would benefit from a
deeper understanding of the causes of efficiency differences.
If a conclusion must be drawn, it would seem that the more autonomous a school is, the better it
performs. This is consistent with much of existing research. This model should be replicated and the
state should encourage policies that incentivize such schools.
Are instrumentality charter schools really “charter” schools? In addressing these policy questions, we
need to remember that a “charter” is not simply a “charter.” Unlike independent and non-instrumentality
charters, instrumentality charters receive the same funding as traditional MPS schools. Unlike independent
and non-instrumentality charters, they are about as inefficient as traditional MPS schools.
This could be because MPS completely controls instrumentality schools in all areas, including the
hiring of teachers and principals, opting to make school employees’ members of the public unions,
and the management of the school. In other words, on many key items that could affect school performance,
there is no difference.
Bang for the Buck
4